6533b832fe1ef96bd129a4ab

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Evaluation of interface pressure and temperature management in five wheelchair seat cushions and their effects on user satisfaction

José-maría BlascoEnrique Sanchis-sánchezEvelin Balaguer-lópezPablo García-molinaManuel Ruescas-lópezSergio Roig Casasus

subject

medicine.medical_specialtyEnvironment controlledDermatologyDenture LinersSittingPathology and Forensic Medicine030207 dermatology & venereal diseases03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationWheelchairInterface pressurePressuremedicineHumansRelative humiditySpinal Cord InjuriesSitting PositionCross-Over Studies030504 nursingbusiness.industryUser satisfactionWheelchairsPatient SatisfactionThermographyCushionOpen cell0305 other medical sciencebusiness

description

Abstract Background Factors such as the manufacturing materials, shape or even the mechanical and thermal response of sitting Pressure Redistribution Support Surfaces (PRSS) can be potential contributors to pressure ulcers. However, few studies have compared a number of characteristics of the most frequently used devices. Objective To compare three potential contributors to pressure ulcers in five commercial PRSS: pressure redistribution, temperature and perceived comfort. Method: Study with a cross-over randomized design in healthy volunteer participants. Data was collected in a temperature and relative humidity controlled environment. To assess thermal response, the temperature (Flir-E60) of the region of interest was captured before and after use of each PRSS for further analysis. The region of interest was the gluteal zone. To assess the pressure redistribution a pressure mat (XSensor®) was used between the 5 cushion and each study participant using a standardized method. Finally, a subjective perception questionnaire recorded comfort, adaptability and thermal sensation parameters. Data analysis levels of significance were set at 0.05. Results A total of 22 participants completed the assessments. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline temperatures between PRSS (>0.05). Pressure redistribution analysis showed significant differences between all PRSS in all variables evaluated except in the maximum and peak pressure index al sacrum. The subjective assessment suggested no major user-perceived differences between PRSS. Conclusion Seat cushions made of open cell polyurethane foam blocks of variable hardness and the horseshoe cushion (also open cell polyurethane foam) seem to provide a more effective pressure relief characteristic than those injected with polyurethane foam and gel in most of the studied pressure variables. However, the cushions provide similar thermal response and perceived comfort.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2021.05.004